The Bible and the Hittites, Exploding another 'Biblical Archaeology' Myth.

The one that has bugged me since I found out about it was the story about the Dead Sea Scrolls backing up the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Scriptures. The Isaiah scroll was the big one mentioned. That story came out in something like 1947 and was retracted in 1948. Yet I heard about it as though it had never been retracted in 1982, and it is still repeated.The Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah represents a 3rd text type, different from both the Masoretic and Septuagint. However, concerning Jeremiah, where the difference between the two texts is much greater, consisting of seven entire different chapters, the Dead Sea Scrolls backed up the Septuagint. That story's true, but no one repeats it, because it's not what we want to hear.By the way, I didn't do as much research as you. All of that came from the article on the Septuagint in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.

Fascinating.I am a disciple of Yeshua, by the way. Radical enough to be living in a somewhat communal Christian community, but I believe in being honest about history, anyway. I am a long-time student of the Pre-Nicene Fathers (as in, I've really read and re-read them), but otherwise not a historian. I love the textual histories. You'll be a very interesting source.Even Brian is an interesting source, and he rather aggressively publishes against our faith on this board. I've learned a lot of history from him nonetheless.

No, I didn't. In fact, I'm trying to think of what you mean, and I think you must be referring to some of the things you poke literalists with.I was thinking of things like questions about Yeshua ever existing, about the occurrence or non-occurrence of the Exodus and the Flood, and even of things like this Hittite issue. Those are favorite issues of yours, and I don't think you're joking about them.By aggressive, I meant quick to post on subjects that would put the historicity of the Hebrew Scriptuers and Christian events at question, not an aggressive attitude.I take it that tongue in cheek means some of your jabs at the more close-minded literalists? I do take those as tongue in cheek.Edited by truthlover, : Took out extraneous words that made my post sound wordy and mamby-pamby.